The GigReporter

On October 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock (24-935), a case that could reshape how arbitration agreements apply across the logistics and delivery industry. At its heart, the case asks whether local delivery drivers—who never cross state lines—can still be considered “transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce” and therefore exempt from arbitration under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).

The question might sound technical, but its impact is anything but. For decades, companies like Flowers Foods and thousands of others across the supply chain have relied on arbitration clauses to resolve disputes efficiently. Arbitration provides a consistent, confidential process and helps avoid the cost and unpredictability of lengthy litigation. Yet recent lower-court decisions have blurred the lines about who is exempt from arbitration, especially for independent contractors in “last-mile” delivery roles.

In this case, a Colorado distributor who delivered baked goods exclusively within his state claimed exemption from arbitration, arguing that because the products originated from out-of-state bakeries, he was part of the broader interstate flow of commerce. The Tenth Circuit agreed, ruling that even intrastate drivers can be considered engaged in interstate commerce if they deliver goods that are part of an interstate supply chain.

That reasoning directly conflicts with the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits, which have held that only workers actively engaged in crossing state or national borders fall under the FAA exemption. With federal courts divided, the Supreme Court’s decision could finally bring clarity to what it means to be a “transportation worker”—and determine whether arbitration agreements can be consistently enforced across the nation.

If the Court sides with Flowers Foods, it would reaffirm the enforceability of arbitration for most local delivery contractors, restoring much-needed uniformity and predictability to the logistics industry. If it sides with Brock, arbitration exemptions could expand dramatically, increasing litigation risk for companies that rely on independent contractor networks.

A favorable ruling for Flowers Foods would help stabilize relationships between logistics brokers, motor carriers, and independent contractors. It would preserve arbitration as a fair and efficient dispute-resolution mechanism, ensuring that both sides can resolve disagreements without the delays of traditional court cases.

For independent contractors, clarity is equally valuable. Many drivers want predictable agreements that let them focus on business growth rather than legal uncertainty. The decision could remove years of confusion over whether intrastate delivery work falls under federal arbitration protections or not.

At SCI, we help both brokers and contractors navigate this evolving legal landscape. Our programs are built to ensure every agreement, classification, and document aligns with federal and state standards. With DocDetection™, SCI’s AI-driven document verification system, we authenticate business credentials, licenses, and tax IDs in real-time—helping ensure every contractor meets compliance requirements before onboarding.

Beyond technology, SCI provides legal and administrative support, including support in misclassification and regulatory audits, helping clients avoid costly disputes and maintain their independent-contractor model with confidence.

The Supreme Court’s review of Flowers Foods v. Brock is more than a legal milestone—it’s an opportunity to bring national consistency to an issue that affects thousands of contractors and companies. Whatever the outcome, SCI remains committed to providing clarity, compliance, and protection across every mile of the logistics network.